The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Spectator as mind reader (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3
Simon (Ted) Edwards
View Profile
Inner circle
London
1527 Posts

Profile of Simon (Ted) Edwards
Quote:
On 2013-08-06 12:29, funsway wrote:
The original post started with "the concept of a spectator as mind reader effect." As a "concept" it should be open to any interpretation and approach. I do not see where he asked for "methods of trickery" or "create the illusion of" -- those are your take, and perhaps part of your life plan. I come with a different view, that by your own words you should respect.


To be fair, this is a magician's forum...
T.
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9063 Posts

Profile of funsway
Quote:
On 2013-08-06 18:16, Simon (Ted) Edwards wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-08-06 12:29, funsway wrote:
The original post started with "the concept of a spectator as mind reader effect." As a "concept" it should be open to any interpretation and approach. I do not see where he asked for "methods of trickery" or "create the illusion of" -- those are your take, and perhaps part of your life plan. I come with a different view, that by your own words you should respect.


To be fair, this is a magician's forum...
T.


Yup -- that is why I offered the actual magic effect. I'll be interested in your comments. However, since magic occurs in the mind of the observer it does not necessarily require a "trick" to create. And a "trick" does not necessarily produce magic.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst

eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com
WitchesHat
View Profile
Regular user
155 Posts

Profile of WitchesHat
Quote:
On 2013-08-06 12:29, funsway wrote:
Interesting WItchesHat -- and I respect your opinion. Yet I don't see where you get to decide what this forum is about or decide what is relevant.


Firstly sorry if I came across rude, I struggle to put thoughts into words and so I often speak bluntly. Also I genuinely respect and admire the fact that when you do argue you keep it civil.

As (Ted I think) pointed out, I don't decide what the forum is about or what is relevant, the forum is about 'magicians helping magicians' and this sub-forum is about 'mentalism' (I.e trickery with a mental presentation) and this thread is about advice on techniques or a trickery based nature to create the illusion of a spectator of a show reading minds. I didn't set any of these factors, the forum creator and original poster did.

Quote:
On 2013-08-06 12:29, funsway wrote:
The original post started with "the concept of a spectator as mind reader effect." As a "concept" it should be open to any interpretation and approach. I do not see where he asked for "methods of trickery" or "create the illusion of" -- those are your take, and perhaps part of your life plan. I come with a different view, that by your own words you should respect. If the title were "Tricking a spectator into thinking they are a mind reader" I probably would not have even read the posting.


True, the title of the thread is open to interpretation, and I certainly agree that my idea of magic, mentalism, entertainment etc is not the only one or the 'correct' one. However If you read the original post it states (I capitalized areas as a highlight):

Quote:
On 2013-08-03 06:48, ed wood wrote:
I've been playing around with the concept of a spectator as mind reader effect for a few years but have never come up with anything that satisfies me. Most of the modern effects in this vein I have read seem to rely heavily on DR which unless extremely subtle I always avoid for the CORPORATES I WORK where people are guarenteed to talk to one another afterwards.
I'm considering the idea of using the Dun***ger ploy to get information from the first AUDIENCE MEMBER TO JOIN ME ON STAGE, something like a star sign or possibly something completely random. I then need to force this on audience member two and this is where I'm drawing a blank. I don't want to go the instant stooge method, again because I am working corporates where people will be talking afterwards, usually over a drink, and I can't see the secret lasting more than a few minutes.
Anyone got any thoughts or recomendations of routines of this nature.
Thanks, Ed


So while the question may be open to interpretation, after reading the original post, the concept of the message becomes clear. This person is looking for effects for both stage and corporate work. Not only that, he gave examples of the type of technique he was looking for, a 'read' (billet imp device etc) and a 'force' (magicians choice, card force, phych force etc)

Quote:
On 2013-08-06 12:29, funsway wrote:
When ones asked for help or assistance with a "concept" there are "seeking advice." If you do not like this advice you should ignore it. If your "life philosophy" equates "entertainment" only with "trickery" then by all means skip any post I make.


The problem with that is, you can't judge whether a post should be ignored or not until you've read it, and by that point it can't be ignored.

Quote:
On 2013-08-06 12:29, funsway wrote:
I have no desire to correct anyone's view of the world. Why do you wish to correct mine? I have never claimed to be any of the things you ascribe to me above.


Firstly at no point did I correct or argue your world views, secondly you claim you don't either but your first response to the original poster was this:

Quote:
On 2013-08-03 07:25, funsway wrote:
It is fairly simple to create a condition or demonstration in which another person will be convinced they can or did "read your mind." I have done this thousands of times with 100% success. The problem is that you wish to do this "for entertainment." More exactly, you wish other people to be convinced that a seemingly random spectator read your mind in a controlled fashion -- and sustain that belief over time. These two objectives are in conflict.


Which was quite aggressive and beside the point of what he was asking, what you told him was to change his performance style and setting, from an entertainment one to a more personal non entertainment one. Can you see how that advice is not helpful?

You then went on to say:

Quote:
On 2013-08-03 07:25, funsway wrote:
For me, the very use of the term "instant stooge" indicates why this approach does not work for you. The only way to achieve either objective (they read your mind vs. entertaining others) is grounding in respect and trust -- at least the perceptions of these qualities.


So there you are telling someone to adopt your world view in regards to performing mind reading. It's fine that you have this opinion of him, but what you're doing is advising him on audience management and performance philosophy. Which once again is in no way related to the original posters question. You also assume he has no respect or trust for his audience, simply because he used a well known technical term in a magic forum, for the purposes of clarity.

You then said:

Quote:
On 2013-08-03 07:25, funsway wrote:
The focus must be on how to create a situation in which the person who reads your mind will never reveal method or does not consciously know the method, or that there is no "method/secret" to reveal. You apparent belief that "I can't see the secret lasting more than a few minutes" means that you can never create the situation in which this is not true. When you "know" that you can select a Volunteer Assistant who will both read your mind and never reveal any "private insight" then you can do that also.


Which can be boiled down to "The longer you perform, the greater your instincts on who will be a cooperative volunteer will develop.'

That can only be learned by doing, so I don't quite get what you were saying here, or the motivation behind saying it.

You finished with:

Quote:
On 2013-08-03 07:25, funsway wrote:
I doubt that you will believe this -- which is the point. You must get beyond believing into knowing. If you get beyond the "playing around" stage drop me a PM.


Which was incredibly arrogant and rude. Firstly you told him that his work was 'playing around'. I would never trivialize an adults job or hobby by calling it that. Honestly think about it, how would you feel if someone categorized what you did as 'playing around'? Can you see how rude and condescending that is to say? Then you said 'drop me a P.M.' Changing it from you giving out advice to requesting that he seek it from you, but only after he's done 'playing around.' (His job remember? That's what you said about his job.)

Essentially you advised him that everything he does is wrong and he should seek out your advice.

Quote:
On 2013-08-03 07:25, funsway wrote:
But, yes, there is always a philosophical component to everything I write and do in life -- my way of doing things. I am not one person on stage and another at home or in a classroom or in church. Any value in what I offer is because it comes from a different point of view and different life experience.


A versatile range of opinions is a good thing yes, but that's the catch 22 of it isn't it? You're sharing your opinion, I'm sharing my opinion that I don't like your opinion, you share your opinion that you don't like mine etc etc.

I'm talking to you, I'm debating with you, I'm arguing with you, but I'm not demanding you get banned or your posts deleted. I'm respecting your right to post your opinions, I'm just not agreeing with them and I'm freely voicing my dissenting opinion.

Quote:
On 2013-08-03 07:25, funsway wrote:
The beauty of any Internet forum is that it is non-intrusive. The reader gets to decide what responses to read and which to ignore. They get to decide what "thoughts" work for them and which do not.


Yes we do, so I'd like to know, do my thoughts work for you? Will you ignore me from now on and just respect my right to post my versatile opinions? Or will you attempt to argue with me?

Quote:
On 2013-08-03 07:25, funsway wrote:
Oops, that is a lecture, right?


Yep.

Quote:
On 2013-08-03 07:25, funsway wrote:
I'll be interested in any response you have to the "trick" I offer.


Could you describe the effect? Not the method or technique just the overall effect from a layman's perspective?


Once again if you felt I've been rude here, that's really not my intention and I apologize if you feel I am. I'm simply disagreeing with your point of view and your execution of those views.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Funsway wrote:

Quote:
... The problem is that you wish to do this "for entertainment."


No, that statement is "the problem." Mentalism IS a form of entertainment. As I've said and written many times before, when it is used outside of that context it is no longer mentalism.
Simon (Ted) Edwards
View Profile
Inner circle
London
1527 Posts

Profile of Simon (Ted) Edwards
Quote:
On 2013-08-06 19:29, funsway wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-08-06 18:16, Simon (Ted) Edwards wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-08-06 12:29, funsway wrote:
The original post started with "the concept of a spectator as mind reader effect." As a "concept" it should be open to any interpretation and approach. I do not see where he asked for "methods of trickery" or "create the illusion of" -- those are your take, and perhaps part of your life plan. I come with a different view, that by your own words you should respect.


To be fair, this is a magician's forum...
T.


Yup -- that is why I offered the actual magic effect. I'll be interested in your comments. However, since magic occurs in the mind of the observer it does not necessarily require a "trick" to create. And a "trick" does not necessarily produce magic.


Ken, I don't really want to get into a long discussion about this. I've found in the past (including on another forum) that it's very hard to have a coherent discussion with you, genuinely no offence intended.

My point, which is in conflict with your view, is that this is a magic forum and, as such, questions and answers are automatically framed by that fact. In other words, you say that "the concept of a spectator as mind reader effect... should be open to any interpretation and approach" but I disagree. We are communicating in the context of this magic forum and mentalism area. Do you not at least partially accept that there are other, more appropriate forums for discussions on self-improvement, philosophy and so on?

Also, what Bob wrote.

T.
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9063 Posts

Profile of funsway
Quote:
On 2013-08-07 00:30, mastermindreader wrote:
Funsway wrote:

Quote:
... The problem is that you wish to do this "for entertainment."


No, that statement is "the problem." Mentalism IS a form of entertainment. As I've said and written many times before, when it is used outside of that context it is no longer mentalism.


Well, Bob and Simon too, this only indicates that you have never really read or considered my previous posts from any perspective except your a priori restrictive definitions of magic and personal experience. I read your posts so as to expand my knowledge and understanding of both. I offer ideas from a different experience so that everyone can consider their views, beliefs and expectations. I have no desire to change anyone's world view -- only perhaps influence how they structure their communication with an audience in a changing world. There does seem a tendency/desire on the part of many on the Café to find support for a pre-established view with instant dislike for anything that does not support that closely held view. But this does not support learning or adaptation to changes in the world or audience.

Bob, I readily agree (and have posted) that the term Mentalism IS a form of entertainment. I have also stated that the fact that what a performer chooses to do in order to get more bookings, or meet some imagined needs "to be entertained" by an audience, necessarily restricts the choices of effects appropriate to the setting and situation. Just because you know how to use a pendulum does not mandate its use in every performance. Just because you think that a particular mind reading effect is "neat" does not mean that it is right for you or appropriate for a given audience. It is because Mentalism is "for entertainment" that consideration must always be given to the expectations of the audience, ethics of using volunteers and sensitivity to the mood/emotions of the setting and audience.

I have never said what the chosen effects should be, nor what one's ethics should be, nor how you should develop your character -- only drawing attention to posts that seem to disregard their consideration.

In this thread the original poster said that he was playing with a concept based on what he considered to be a neat idea. Other statements led to my opinion that he is not yet prepared to present such an effect in the setting described. I offered to help him privately either enhance the focus and skills essential to performing such an effect, or to mentor his development of such an effect prior to presentation. Why isn't this viewed as "magicians helping magicians?" After attacking my right to offer such an opinion and (to me) a deliberate misstatement of what I had said and attributing motivations to me from his imagination/fear -- he offered that what he had written was not what he meant. Others have chimed in with an apparent view that "helping" does not include anything but positive support for what the poster might be saying even if he doesn't. Sigh!

Now we have the expressed view that Mentalism must be based on some "trick" -- and the somehow "knowing what" in the form of buying a trick makes it appropriate to perform it in any situation. I firmly disagree! Is a pendulum a "trick?" Is NLP a "trick?" Is recognizing when you have an Ideally cooperative Volunteer before you and select a presentation to take advantage of the opportunity a "trick?" Is having a dozen effects prepared so that the one best suited for the setting and audience presented a "trick?" Yes, it is definitional -- but having superior knowledge is not the same kind of "trick" that a secret earwig is. For me the "trick" must always be secondary to many other factors. The fact that so many seem upset over consideration of issues other than "show me the trick" validates the need for such consideration.

These factors are essential to Mentalism -- certainly not "outside" of it.

It is more important to "know how" to include knowing when not to perform any particular effect. Magic as a a performing art is waning in my opinion because performers think that buying the latest "trick" or emulating a YouTube snippet makes them entertaining or a Magician (to include Mentalism). to whit: (opinions)

If you cannot properly and respectfully select and utilize Volunteer Assistants no "trick" is good enough to meet the needs of either performer or audience,

If you can learn how to manage VA's properly almost any "trick" can be wonderful in a particular setting,

the fact that a performer thinks that a particular trick is "kool" does not mean it is a good effect for them or a planned audience,

the issues of personal growth, ethics and philosophy are ALWAYS appropriate to any interaction with other persons -- not just in Mentalism or "entertainment" but in everything that you do in life.

None of that mean that I have the right or calling to tell anyone what they SHOULD do. It does mean that when someone asks for assistance that I draw attention to issues that may have been overlooked. Since my experiences are different from others here my suggestions will be different. The amazing part of the responses here are those who feel a need to label me in some disparaging way or claim for me motives never held or expressed. If you wish to understand what or why -- that is what PM's are for.

As noted by DWR -- select from my ideas what works for you and discard the rest. There is no requirement to attempt to change my world view or even "argue" with me.

In short [right ;-)] the fact that any of you do not like my comments does not mean the idea is "wrong" "evil" "based on some weird motivation" or "more suitable for another forum." Certainly it given no one the right to mangle what I have said to fit into their personal bias or perceptions. When I feel I have misinterpreted another's statement I ask questions to clarify. I would ask that you'all do the same.

Now --

how about looking at the Effect I have offered and provide comments. That is something "real" to discuss. It does have a "trick" and insights into Volunteer management.

I don't see anyone else offering an actual effect. Bob? Simon? Where are your offerings?
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst

eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9063 Posts

Profile of funsway
WitchesHat --

I think a re-read of what I actually said will answer most of your questions. For example -- you say, "you told him was to change his performance style and setting, from an entertainment one to a more personal non entertainment one."

I never said that at all. I am clueless as to why or how you would derive that from what I said. I did say that the concept he is "playing with" may not be ideal for him or the planned setting based on the comments he made. I did say that his desire to be an entertainer in a particular setting for an audience of known "chit-chats" may indicate this effect approach is not best for him. I did honestly offer to assist him (off list) develop such an effect or evaluate what he plans to do. That may be "personal" in the "for him" sense, but not requiring he change his setting or style. My opinion that he "not do it" does not imply he should do it somewhere else. I haven't seen anyone else offering to help him develop such an effect.

and so on ...

No, I will not describe the effect in general sense. If you desire to study it then request it in its entirety. This "out of context" approach is perhaps the source of the problem here. It took me 50 years to decide to publish this effect, and a year to decide how to describe it. There is not shortcut not "cheat" to make it more simple or astounding. The fact that it is "not for everything" accentuates what I have said above. Not every "trick" or "setting" is best for a particular performer. I only perform this effect when the conditions are ideal for its success.

Sorry if that approach to performing and Mentalism does appeal to you.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst

eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9063 Posts

Profile of funsway
Quote:
On 2013-08-07 00:30, mastermindreader wrote:
Funsway wrote:

Quote:
... The problem is that you wish to do this "for entertainment."


No, that statement is "the problem." Mentalism IS a form of entertainment. As I've said and written many times before, when it is used outside of that context it is no longer mentalism.


Well, Bob and Simon too, this only indicates that you have never really read or considered my previous posts from any perspective except your a priori restrictive definitions of magic and personal experience. I read your posts so as to expand my knowledge and understanding of both. I offer ideas from a different experience so that everyone can consider their views, beliefs and expectations. I have no desire to change anyone's world view -- only perhaps influence how they structure their communication with an audience in a changing world. There does seem a tendency/desire on the part of many on the Café to find support for a pre-established view with instant dislike for anything that does not support that closely held view. But this does not support learning or adaptation to changes in the world or audience.

Bob, I readily agree (and have posted) that the term Mentalism IS a form of entertainment. I have also stated that the fact that what a performer chooses to do in order to get more bookings, or meet some imagined needs "to be entertained" by an audience, necessarily restricts the choices of effects appropriate to the setting and situation. Just because you know how to use a pendulum does not mandate its use in every performance. Just because you think that a particular mind reading effect is "neat" does not mean that it is right for you or appropriate for a given audience. It is because Mentalism is "for entertainment" that consideration must always be given to the expectations of the audience, ethics of using volunteers and sensitivity to the mood/emotions of the setting and audience.

I have never said what the chosen effects should be, nor what one's ethics should be, nor how you should develop your character -- only drawing attention to posts that seem to disregard their consideration.

In this thread the original poster said that he was playing with a concept based on what he considered to be a neat idea. Other statements led to my opinion that he is not yet prepared to present such an effect in the setting described. I offered to help him privately either enhance the focus and skills essential to performing such an effect, or to mentor his development of such an effect prior to presentation. Why isn't this viewed as "magicians helping magicians?" After attacking my right to offer such an opinion and (to me) a deliberate misstatement of what I had said and attributing motivations to me from his imagination/fear -- he offered that what he had written was not what he meant. Others have chimed in with an apparent view that "helping" does not include anything but positive support for what the poster might be saying even if he doesn't. Sigh!

Now we have the expressed view that Mentalism must be based on some "trick" -- and the somehow "knowing what" in the form of buying a trick makes it appropriate to perform it in any situation. I firmly disagree! Is a pendulum a "trick?" Is NLP a "trick?" Is recognizing when you have an Ideally cooperative Volunteer before you and select a presentation to take advantage of the opportunity a "trick?" Is having a dozen effects prepared so that the one best suited for the setting and audience presented a "trick?" Yes, it is definitional -- but having superior knowledge is not the same kind of "trick" that a secret earwig is. For me the "trick" must always be secondary to many other factors. The fact that so many seem upset over consideration of issues other than "show me the trick" validates the need for such consideration.

These factors are essential to Mentalism -- certainly not "outside" of it.

It is more important to "know how" to include knowing when not to perform any particular effect. Magic as a a performing art is waning in my opinion because performers think that buying the latest "trick" or emulating a YouTube snippet makes them entertaining or a Magician (to include Mentalism). to whit: (opinions)

If you cannot properly and respectfully select and utilize Volunteer Assistants no "trick" is good enough to meet the needs of either performer or audience,

If you can learn how to manage VA's properly almost any "trick" can be wonderful in a particular setting,

the fact that a performer thinks that a particular trick is "kool" does not mean it is a good effect for them or a planned audience,

the issues of personal growth, ethics and philosophy are ALWAYS appropriate to any interaction with other persons -- not just in Mentalism or "entertainment" but in everything that you do in life.

None of that mean that I have the right or calling to tell anyone what they SHOULD do. It does mean that when someone asks for assistance that I draw attention to issues that may have been overlooked. Since my experiences are different from others here my suggestions will be different. The amazing part of the responses here are those who feel a need to label me in some disparaging way or claim for me motives never held or expressed. If you wish to understand what or why -- that is what PM's are for.

As noted by DWR -- select from my ideas what works for you and discard the rest. There is no requirement to attempt to change my world view or even "argue" with me.

In short [right ;-)] the fact that any of you do not like my comments does not mean the idea is "wrong" "evil" "based on some weird motivation" or "more suitable for another forum." Certainly it given no one the right to mangle what I have said to fit into their personal bias or perceptions. When I feel I have misinterpreted another's statement I ask questions to clarify. I would ask that you'all do the same.

Now --

how about looking at the Effect I have offered and provide comments. That is something "real" to discuss. It does have a "trick" and insights into Volunteer management.

I don't see anyone else offering an actual effect. Bob? Simon? Where are your offerings?
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst

eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com
migwar
View Profile
Elite user
west yorkshire, UK
457 Posts

Profile of migwar
There is an effect in Mitox by Phil Smith which in which 2 specators remotely view a photo in a sealed envelope. I'm not sure if it could be classed as DR/IS but is an interesting concept and wonder if the right minds could develop it further. I'll be honest I'm probably not bold enough to try it!
WitchesHat
View Profile
Regular user
155 Posts

Profile of WitchesHat
I'm not going to respond to you in full funswoay, as this thread is already completely derailed, remember this is not a thread about you. If you want to continue this discussion feel free to start another thread.

Please respect the original posters desire for what this thread discussion is about.

All I will say is you demand that I respect you, but you've done nothing to earn that respect, and I'm not going to ask for your trick if I don't know what it is, because if it's not my style then I won't bother learning it and I'll just be wasting your time.

When your done playing around and want a real discussion, start a new topic and I'll respectfully join in and share ideas and philosophies.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Funsway wrote:

Quote:
...Now we have the expressed view that Mentalism must be based on some "trick" -- and the somehow "knowing what" in the form of buying a trick makes it appropriate to perform it in any situation. I firmly disagree!


That's a pure straw man argument, Ken. NO ONE, as far as I can see, EVER stated that "knowing what" made something appropriate to perform in any situation. OF COURSE there are artistic considerations to be made in structuring a meaningful AND entertaining show.

Now you demand that I provide an "offering" of an effect. I believe I've provided more than a few over the years. I guess you missed the following exchange earlier on this thread:

Quote:
On 2013-08-03 16:28, ed wood wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-08-03 15:55, mastermindreader wrote:
Ed-

Have you considered having participants gaze into a crystal or other scrying-type object (ring, inkblot, hypno-spiral, watch crystal, etc.) as a means of "focusing" their thoughts?

I can't get into methods here, but I'm sure you know what I'm getting at. If an audience member later says to a friend, "Well I SAW it in the crystal," nothing would be exposed.

Sorry for the reception you got here.

Good thoughts,

Bob


Hi Bob,
Whilst I have considered the use of a crystal I have always dismissed it as I've felt it's use would be out of place with the style of my performance. The use of an inkblot or a hypno spiral, particularly the hypno spiral as it's something I already use on stage, could work. In fact that is a darn good idea, now that is the kind of advice I was hoping for. Thank you so much for taking the time to think and write about this subject. I really think a hypno spiral could be perfect, for a long time I've been considering an object for a person to stare at for the information to be "transmitted" through and the spiral would perfectly match my presentation, brilliant!!
As for the reception here, I had been warned to expect it but the knowledge and support of the few more than surpasses the lack of manners of the remainder.
Thanks, Ed
backinblack
View Profile
Special user
891 Posts

Profile of backinblack
Back to topic:

check
*sanctum from outlaw effects
*between the lines from Michael murray
WitchesHat
View Profile
Regular user
155 Posts

Profile of WitchesHat
Quote:
On 2013-08-07 15:38, backinblack wrote:
Back to topic:

check
*sanctum from outlaw effects
*between the lines from Michael murray


Not bad for two pages eh?
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Spectator as mind reader (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.46 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL